Good picture we could put on the page with the student interviews.
http://www.weblogcartoons.com/cartoons/facebook.gif
Monday, 26 November 2007
Monday, 19 November 2007
Week 7!
Since Wednesday, Mette and myself have done the "student survey" at LCC. We asked students outside of university about what they thought a "Virtual Community" was . Most of the students seemed to be very confused by the word "virtual" and were much more responsive when we changed it to "Online Communities". As soon as we mentioned "Online Communitites", students asked: "Oh, ok, do you mean MySpace or Facebook?". It was interesting to see that students associated "online communities" only to these social networking websites. Most of them had an account but not all of them used it. We are in a University in which communication, networking and exhibition of your work is very important in order to find a pathway in the media industry. Because of this, I was really surprised that not everyone was keen to use these websites. Personally I have Facebook and I find MySpace too complicated. I think MySpace is more about listening to music/watching videos/finding out about vnues or concerts and maybe talking to people you have never met, whereas Facebook seems to me more private... On Facebook, I have created a Media and Cultural studies group for our class which permits me to send messages to the members regarding issues about the course (as I am the Course representative of the class). The problem is that not everyone in the class is on Facebook, therefore I have to email people as well... but I still get quicker responses from my Facebook messages then from emails. People seem to be checking their Facebook profiles more often then emails!
After all these issues, it is difficult to come to a general agreement around the use of social networking sites...!
Since the meeting, we have been communicating with members of the group via emails and have been progressing in our work without having to meet each other outside of classes. With Khristina, we emailed our work and received prompt responses from Mette and Leda. As soon as changes were made, the documents were e-mailed to each of us. Everyone seemed to be really stressed out regarding the project but progressively it was coming into existence. In my opinion, the aim of our project is now clearly defined with specific study cases.
Having been editing the documents, I now think it is important not to add information but to "harmonize" our already written work. On monday, we are going to put all our information on our group wiki and make it as interactive and interesting as we can. Because it is an online project, we have the chance to add different media such as pictures, links or videos. We have clearly defined sections with bullet points and are trying to avoid having just a big written paragraph (not very attractive to read).
It was difficult not to write too much, cut down on theorists quotes, make the project more personal and not to simplify the different theories. At the beginning of the project, we asked ourselves a number of questions (in the introduction of the project and then in the different sections) that we were surprised to find answers to most of them.
TO ADD TO OUR WIKI
Dangers of Facebook on Youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMWz3G_gPhU
After all these issues, it is difficult to come to a general agreement around the use of social networking sites...!
Since the meeting, we have been communicating with members of the group via emails and have been progressing in our work without having to meet each other outside of classes. With Khristina, we emailed our work and received prompt responses from Mette and Leda. As soon as changes were made, the documents were e-mailed to each of us. Everyone seemed to be really stressed out regarding the project but progressively it was coming into existence. In my opinion, the aim of our project is now clearly defined with specific study cases.
Having been editing the documents, I now think it is important not to add information but to "harmonize" our already written work. On monday, we are going to put all our information on our group wiki and make it as interactive and interesting as we can. Because it is an online project, we have the chance to add different media such as pictures, links or videos. We have clearly defined sections with bullet points and are trying to avoid having just a big written paragraph (not very attractive to read).
It was difficult not to write too much, cut down on theorists quotes, make the project more personal and not to simplify the different theories. At the beginning of the project, we asked ourselves a number of questions (in the introduction of the project and then in the different sections) that we were surprised to find answers to most of them.
TO ADD TO OUR WIKI
Dangers of Facebook on Youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMWz3G_gPhU
Wednesday, 14 November 2007
Wednesday 14th November: group meeting...
Today, as agreed, I was supposed to meet Khristina and Mette in the library in order to work on our group project. Leda told us she couldn't come as she was moving houses so she send us a document on "Online identities". Mette told us at the last minute that she couldn't come as well as she was feeling really ill but that she would do some work at home. She asked us to email her our work and tell her what she could add/do to make the project progress.
Regarding the work done on Wednesday... I went through the written work that has already been done and also added some of my own research. There was a lot of editing to do as everyone writes in different styles. I made my best to
-harmonize the work (grammar, sentence structure...),
-make it visually appealing (bullet points, paragraphs, titles...)
-clarify our different points (introduction, questioning, different theories...)
-rewrite the introduction
The main problem I encountered was with Leda'a work as she did not reference her sources. In her document, she put only the year of the book she took the quotes out without puting the page numbers. In some cases, other details were missing. I think it is really important to reference correctly so I send her an email asking her to go through her references and add the missing information.
By reading all other people's work, I realized people had entirely different styles of writing and that it was important (for each person in the group) to go through each others work in order to bring a new perspective on it.
Regarding the work done on Wednesday... I went through the written work that has already been done and also added some of my own research. There was a lot of editing to do as everyone writes in different styles. I made my best to
-harmonize the work (grammar, sentence structure...),
-make it visually appealing (bullet points, paragraphs, titles...)
-clarify our different points (introduction, questioning, different theories...)
-rewrite the introduction
The main problem I encountered was with Leda'a work as she did not reference her sources. In her document, she put only the year of the book she took the quotes out without puting the page numbers. In some cases, other details were missing. I think it is really important to reference correctly so I send her an email asking her to go through her references and add the missing information.
By reading all other people's work, I realized people had entirely different styles of writing and that it was important (for each person in the group) to go through each others work in order to bring a new perspective on it.
Monday, 12 November 2007
Week 6
It is already week 6! time passes by so quickly!
Roles in the group are pretty defined by now: Mette and Leda did theory research, Mette has also been updating our wiki page, whereas Khristina and myself have been looking online for links, images, videos, ... (in other words, specific examples of virtual communities).
Today we discuss in the group things we could add/change in our wiki page.
So far, we all agree that it needs to be more interactive. We also want to make our research easier to read by playing with the layout: bullet points, subtitles...
We also had the opportunity today to look at last year's projects - that looked really impressing by the way! We saw concrete written work and some realized that it was not as academic as they thought it should be. I think it helped the class to have a better understanding on the outcome of the project.
Roles in the group are pretty defined by now: Mette and Leda did theory research, Mette has also been updating our wiki page, whereas Khristina and myself have been looking online for links, images, videos, ... (in other words, specific examples of virtual communities).
Today we discuss in the group things we could add/change in our wiki page.
So far, we all agree that it needs to be more interactive. We also want to make our research easier to read by playing with the layout: bullet points, subtitles...
We also had the opportunity today to look at last year's projects - that looked really impressing by the way! We saw concrete written work and some realized that it was not as academic as they thought it should be. I think it helped the class to have a better understanding on the outcome of the project.
Sunday, 11 November 2007
Reflections and work done this week...
WEBSITES
I found it really hard this week to find a "bad" and a "good" website.
In my opinion, instead of looking at a poorly designed website (easy to find when you use Google), I started thinking about websites that I personally had difficulties with when I was navigating online. I have been to both of these restaurants and I have never been so disappointed by a restaurant's website like with Sketch.
WORK DONE.. PLANS... EVOLUTION OF MY PERSONAL FEELING REGARDING THE BLOG..
Following last week's session, we decided to include, after the theoretical definitions of "Virtual communities" a list of definitions from students from LCC (not from Media and Cultural studies) that I had to interview last week.
Unfortunately, (and I apologize to the group), I was not able to interview the students last week as I was focusing on a seminar that I was presenting.
Despite not being able to conduct the interviews, I read through Leda and Mette's work and noted some changes that could be made.
I also continued my research on the existence of different "groups" within a "virtual community". This expression can be contested of course as there is certain confusion between the terms "group" and "community".
What do we mean by "community"? - Does that involve more personal investment then if you are part of a group?
In my opinion, a community is a group, BUT a group is not necessarily a community.
For example, our class is a group, but except our studies, there is no particular specific criterion that keeps us "united”.
I am happy that this project is finally taking a shape and I am looking forward for Wednesday when we are going to put all the information as a group together. I have started lately to enjoy the idea/concept of blogging! Really! I was feeling so uncomfortable at the beginning because a personal reflection -for me- was "personal"! Not to be posted online for everyone to see.
My view has completely changed as now this blog helps me to keep track of my work and post information for my group. I hope I am not repeating myself - but it is something I think about whenever I am writing on my blog. I observed in the group that I was not the only one who's feeling regarding the blog evolved throughout the weeks.
Only slight disappointment: I do not receive a lot of comments!
I found it really hard this week to find a "bad" and a "good" website.
In my opinion, instead of looking at a poorly designed website (easy to find when you use Google), I started thinking about websites that I personally had difficulties with when I was navigating online. I have been to both of these restaurants and I have never been so disappointed by a restaurant's website like with Sketch.
WORK DONE.. PLANS... EVOLUTION OF MY PERSONAL FEELING REGARDING THE BLOG..
Following last week's session, we decided to include, after the theoretical definitions of "Virtual communities" a list of definitions from students from LCC (not from Media and Cultural studies) that I had to interview last week.
Unfortunately, (and I apologize to the group), I was not able to interview the students last week as I was focusing on a seminar that I was presenting.
Despite not being able to conduct the interviews, I read through Leda and Mette's work and noted some changes that could be made.
I also continued my research on the existence of different "groups" within a "virtual community". This expression can be contested of course as there is certain confusion between the terms "group" and "community".
What do we mean by "community"? - Does that involve more personal investment then if you are part of a group?
In my opinion, a community is a group, BUT a group is not necessarily a community.
For example, our class is a group, but except our studies, there is no particular specific criterion that keeps us "united”.
I am happy that this project is finally taking a shape and I am looking forward for Wednesday when we are going to put all the information as a group together. I have started lately to enjoy the idea/concept of blogging! Really! I was feeling so uncomfortable at the beginning because a personal reflection -for me- was "personal"! Not to be posted online for everyone to see.
My view has completely changed as now this blog helps me to keep track of my work and post information for my group. I hope I am not repeating myself - but it is something I think about whenever I am writing on my blog. I observed in the group that I was not the only one who's feeling regarding the blog evolved throughout the weeks.
Only slight disappointment: I do not receive a lot of comments!
"Good" and "Bad" websites: 2 examples
In order to decide what a "good" and a "bad" website is, it is important to set certain criteria.
- Design
- Ease of navigation
- Accessibility to information
- Representation of the "brand"
I chose to compare websites of two "fashionable" restaurants: the "Kong" in Paris and "Sketch" in London. Both restaurants have a good reputation and are seen as more "innovative" places in terms of decoration, food fusion, and events.
At first glance, both websites seen to present similar criteria:
Nice interactive design, music, originality that correspond to the restaurants' "branding".
For me, Sketch's website is too difficult to navigate on. When you click on a certain section, it is very difficult to come back to the main menu. In order to find specific information, you have to explore the different links of the site - the information is not immediate. In my opinion, you can have an original and interactive website like the Kong without using pop ups.
I personally feel a bit lost on Sketch's website as whenever you click on something, it opens new windows. If you close a window, you go back to the intro of the website (AGAIN you hear the same music and wait for the loading of the information).
"Bad website":
http://www.sketch.uk.com/
* It is a restaurant with French owners and you cannot even change the language (only in English)
* Poor navigation:
- It is hard to go back to the main menu
- New windows keep opening up (you loose the track of where you are)
- Frustrating
* Not lack of information but difficulty to find information
* It takes too much time to get accustomed to the website's navigation
"Good website":
http://www.kong.fr/
* Clear, straightforward information
* Nice design
* Can be viewed in French or in English
* Easy access to different sections of the website
For both restaurants it is important to build a strong image and have a good website representing their values/quality/brand online. Often, you can judge a restaurant by the quality, design and services of their website. You can see whether or not it is fashionable/hype and if the food in itself is good (online menu, presentation of the chef, photo gallery, online reservations and so on).
For Sketch, I think the website is "overdone" and therefore difficult to navigate on.
- Design
- Ease of navigation
- Accessibility to information
- Representation of the "brand"
I chose to compare websites of two "fashionable" restaurants: the "Kong" in Paris and "Sketch" in London. Both restaurants have a good reputation and are seen as more "innovative" places in terms of decoration, food fusion, and events.
At first glance, both websites seen to present similar criteria:
Nice interactive design, music, originality that correspond to the restaurants' "branding".
For me, Sketch's website is too difficult to navigate on. When you click on a certain section, it is very difficult to come back to the main menu. In order to find specific information, you have to explore the different links of the site - the information is not immediate. In my opinion, you can have an original and interactive website like the Kong without using pop ups.
I personally feel a bit lost on Sketch's website as whenever you click on something, it opens new windows. If you close a window, you go back to the intro of the website (AGAIN you hear the same music and wait for the loading of the information).
"Bad website":
http://www.sketch.uk.com/
* It is a restaurant with French owners and you cannot even change the language (only in English)
* Poor navigation:
- It is hard to go back to the main menu
- New windows keep opening up (you loose the track of where you are)
- Frustrating
* Not lack of information but difficulty to find information
* It takes too much time to get accustomed to the website's navigation
"Good website":
http://www.kong.fr/
* Clear, straightforward information
* Nice design
* Can be viewed in French or in English
* Easy access to different sections of the website
For both restaurants it is important to build a strong image and have a good website representing their values/quality/brand online. Often, you can judge a restaurant by the quality, design and services of their website. You can see whether or not it is fashionable/hype and if the food in itself is good (online menu, presentation of the chef, photo gallery, online reservations and so on).
For Sketch, I think the website is "overdone" and therefore difficult to navigate on.
Monday, 5 November 2007
Week 5 - Reflection, research, the group project is coming together...
Links regarding Facebook and communities within Facebook:
http://webcommunityforum.com/
==> very interesting article about a company having Facebook fridays to encourage networking.
http://elgg.net/csessums/weblog/9412.html
Plans:
As a group we are meeting next week and we are going to put all the information we have together in a coherent way. We are going to structure our information and see what is missing/could be added or delete it.
Outline of the project:
Online communities = definitions, questionnaire
Communities/Groups - what is the difference?
- is a community a group but a group is not necessarily a community?
Question of identity
Conclusion
http://webcommunityforum.com/
==> very interesting article about a company having Facebook fridays to encourage networking.
http://elgg.net/csessums/weblog/9412.html
Plans:
As a group we are meeting next week and we are going to put all the information we have together in a coherent way. We are going to structure our information and see what is missing/could be added or delete it.
Outline of the project:
Online communities = definitions, questionnaire
Communities/Groups - what is the difference?
- is a community a group but a group is not necessarily a community?
Question of identity
Conclusion
Week 4
Last week I was absent as I had to go back home due to family matters. I warned my group in advance and we decided upon which research I was going to undertake. The class wiki permitted me to stay up to date to what has been covered in class and to do all the reading.
Reading Jean Lave's and Etienne Wenger's concerning "Communities of Practice" made me think about several issues. In my opinion, it is through interaction tat we become "street smart" and not only "book smart". It is important to be aware of the people around us not only because they bring us new knowledge/perspectives, but also because we are all part of a community in which we have to grow/learn/interact/live/work...
Is it possible to have that same sense of community online? Common interests bound groups together but is face-to-face interaction more enriching (socially/intellectually). Can online interaction be part of the educational process?
My research:
I continue doing research on different online communities.
I tried to use the online database (Jstor) to find some articles but my passwords did not work so I have to ask the IT person in the library for help.
Our project:
It starts to have a certain format (introduction, body, conclusion)
We are starting to build it up.
Reading Jean Lave's and Etienne Wenger's concerning "Communities of Practice" made me think about several issues. In my opinion, it is through interaction tat we become "street smart" and not only "book smart". It is important to be aware of the people around us not only because they bring us new knowledge/perspectives, but also because we are all part of a community in which we have to grow/learn/interact/live/work...
Is it possible to have that same sense of community online? Common interests bound groups together but is face-to-face interaction more enriching (socially/intellectually). Can online interaction be part of the educational process?
My research:
I continue doing research on different online communities.
I tried to use the online database (Jstor) to find some articles but my passwords did not work so I have to ask the IT person in the library for help.
Our project:
It starts to have a certain format (introduction, body, conclusion)
We are starting to build it up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
